Legal Opinion

Hindman v. First Nat. Bank of Louisville

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided February 4, 1902No. 902PublishedCited by 89 opinions

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kentucky. This was an action by Thomas O. Hindman to recover damages for the fraudulent and false representations of the defendants, whereby he was induced to buy shares of the capital stock of the Columbian Fire Insurance Company of America, which shares have proven worthless. A demurrer to the petition was sustained, and the plaintiff’s petition dismissed.

Read the full summary

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kentucky. This was an action by Thomas O. Hindman to recover damages for the fraudulent and false representations of the defendants, whereby he was induced to buy shares of the capital stock of the Columbian Fire Insurance Company of America, which shares have proven worthless. A demurrer to the petition was sustained, and the plaintiff’s petition dismissed. At a former term of this court we held that the court below had erred in sustaining the demurrer, and the cause was remanded, with directions to overrule same. 39 C.…

1Opinion of the CourtLurton, Circuit Judge

The plaintiff in error has presented no less than 182 assignments of error, an unnecessarily prodigious number. No less than 41 of these are errors assigned upon the charge of the court. These are all based upon 8 exceptions taken to the charge. Objection is made that these exceptions are too general; that each is an exception covering several distinct propositions; and that, if any proposition be good, the whole exception must fail. Johnson v. Garber, 19 C. C. A. 556, 73 Fed. 523. An exception to a charge should be taken before the jury retire. It should be sufficiently definite to call the…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. PrenticeSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  2. Washington Gas Light Co. v. LansdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  3. Smith v. BollesSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  4. Mobile & Montgomery Railway Co. v. JureySupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  5. Kountze v. . KennedyNew York Court of Appeals · 1895

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by89 opinions

  1. James-Dickinson Farm Mortgage Co. v. HarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Estate Counseling Service, Inc., a Corporation v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1962
  3. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,208 Myron Harris v. American Investment CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
  4. Jefferson Standard Life Insurance v. HedrickSupreme Court of Virginia · 1943
  5. National Park Bank v. L. & N. R. R.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1917

84 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API